Giles Fraser writes:
I am, as they say, on the wrong side of the
argument. A YouGov poll out this week demonstrated convincingly that the public
strongly support the idea that we have a right to choose when we die. Doctors
still don't, MPs don't, and the clergy don't. But even the majority of people
in the pews now support assisted suicide.
And I have little doubt that, soon enough, the
law will follow. These days, people say they want to die quickly, painlessly in
their sleep and without becoming a burden. Apparently, this is what a good
death now looks like. Well, I want to offer a minority report.
I do want to be a burden on my loved ones just as
I want them to be a burden on me – it's called looking after each other.
Obviously, I know people are terrified of the indignity of dying and of being
ill generally. Having someone wipe our bums, clean up our mess, put up with our
incoherent ramblings and mood swings is a threat to our cherished sense of
personal autonomy.
But this is where the liberal model of individual
self-determination breaks down. For it is when we are this vulnerable that we
have little choice but to allow ourselves to be loved and looked after. Lying
in a bed full of our own faeces, unable to do anything about it, is when we
break with the idea of René Descartes' pernicious "I think therefore
I am".
No, we are not brains in vats. We are not
solitary self-defining intellectual identities who form temporary alliances
with each other for short-term mutual advantage. My existence is fundamentally
bound up with yours. Of course, I will clean you up. Of course, I will hold
your hand in the long hours of the night. Shut up about being a burden. I love
you. This is what it means to love you. Surely, there is something
extraordinarily beautiful about all of this.
Likewise, I have no fondness for pain per se. And
I can even imagine taking a draught of something myself one day, were some pain
to become utterly intolerable. I do understand. And, yes, even understand that
helping others to do it can sometimes be an act of mercy.
But it is also right to push back against the
general assumption that pain reduction is unproblematic. For pain is so much a
part of life that its suppression can also be a suppression of a great deal of
that which is valuable. Constantly anaesthetising ourselves against pain is
also a way to reduce our exposure to so much that is wonderful about life.
Yet too many of us make a Faustian pact with
pharmacology, welcoming its obvious benefits, but ignoring the fact that drugs
also can demand your soul. That's perhaps why we speak of the overly drugged-up
as zombies.
Finally, the contemporary "good death"
is one that happens without the dying person knowing all that much about it.
But what about the need for time to say goodbye and sorry and thank you? It is
as if we want to die without actually knowing we are dying.
Much of this originates in the excessive fear we
now have of dying, a fear that is amplified by the let's pretend game that we
play when we remove death from public view. It is precisely this fear that
operates when adults worry about taking children to the funeral because
"it will upset them".
As with many things like this, it is a reflection
of adult anxiety rather than the child's ability to cope. And the message it
communicates is that death is something strange, weird, and spooky. This only
serves to incubate our fear and encourages us to devise further strategies
to keep the full knowledge of its reality at bay.
My problem with euthanasia is not that it is an
immoral way to die, but that it has its roots in a fearful way to live.
No comments:
Post a Comment